Caligae Construction

[Caballo]

Martin wrote: "And especially if you have any that shows the inside of the heel area! "

Your wish is my command!

[Caballo]

And one from a different angle

[Martin Moser]

A few thoughts on Caballo's most excellent pics:

On the back of the caliga and on the tip of the tabs you can see lines which might either have been additional decoration or markings from when the leather was initially cut to shape (arrows A)

There are two seams running down the heel vertically, a typical caliga construction, also common with the Mainz finds. The inner one (arrow B), with only holes remaining probably is a grain/edge seam, often doubled by a flesh/edge seam from the inside, but that's not visible here.
Originally the two back halves would have joined all the way down to the sole, i.e. no triangular gap there, covered all the way by the protective , probably parallel-sided leather band above.



The cutouts are decorated with little buds in the corners, a decoration also often seen with european finds (arrow C). The protective leather band covering the back seam seems to have a narrower, double inner seam. Stitching is narrow-spaced and with thin thread, holes do not appear to go through the layer beneath, so this may have been another decorational feature (arrow D)



There are traces of stitching in a few places (not only the heel) visible on the underside of the (middle layer) sole, indicating that it was not only nailed, but also stichted to the outer sole. The way the leather budges out between every other interval of holes is exactly what it looks like when you attach the outer sole with a single forward tunnel stitch. (arrow E)



Looking forward to more pics!

[Caballo]

Martin,

Thanks- great analysis. Some more of the sole:-

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Nice pics! In fact, the better pics i have seen of a real calliga.


At that pic seems as if another band were in the inner side, probably glued, marked by a clearer coloration of the leather.

What do you think?

[James B.]

I have a related question about caligea; are their any finds with extra heel pieces added into the layers making the sole, so that the heel is taller? My first pair compressed far more in the heel than the rest of the foot and it messes with my calf muscles.

Some stacked leather medieval pattens made in the same way as roman shoes have just heels added in between the whole soles.

[gaiusseptimiuslucianus]

"Almost looks as though someone ripped the sole with the studs away from the upper part, looking at the holes?" Early re-cycling? Those hobnails are valuable, and ripping may preserve more of the hobnail's shaft?

I wouldn't be surprised, I do the same thing! If they're salvageable I just straighten them out and use them again. At $19lb I don't want to waste them.

All thanks to those wonderful people in the British Museum.....

And many thanks to you Caballo!

Lucianus
_______
L.E. Pearson

[Matt Lukes]

Clearly, thanks to the scale that Paul put into the photos (good on you!), it's reasonably clear that the leather is between 4 and 5mm thick and that the widest section of strap is also 4-5mm. From that it can be seen that the narrower straps- the majority of them- are actually only about 3mm in width throughout virtually all of their lengths, save for the base where they're wider.

[Matt Lukes]

Sorry Matt, but I disagree with you 100%. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Do you also have a rough idea as to how wide the modern straps are, versus the antique? I'm interested to see the margin of error that you deem acceptable, and not. And having a strap that is 1/8" thicker on average is NOT even remotely in the same category as the trooper helm.

Well I sure hope we're not disagreeing about straps that are only 1/4" in width- I wouldn't ever consider that particularly wide LOL It's not 100% correct, but it's hardly way off to the eye. I'm thinking of the ones that are 1cm and larger- the WIDE ones. Besides, it's a matter of proportion- 1/8" wider than reality if reality is 1/8", that's TWICE what they should be, yes? If you go to 3/4" that's 300% too big- it adds up quickly.

As for Paul's pictures and the others I have of real caligae, the straps do look to be about 3mm in width- MUCH narrower than might be obvious.

[Magnus]

You know what though? Are you comparing both your caligae (if you've made any), as well as Marten's and historical originals, to the average joe's? Because I hate to point this out, but you guys, as well as the craftsmen who originally made sandals in the Roman Army, had more skill as well as access to originals and a better eye for detail.

My sandals that I measured:



Are well within the proper width, but when you put them on my feet the straps look thicker because they're butted up next to each other. I probably made my sandals a bit big...I'm not much a pro at it, so my foot doesn't stretch the straps out much. And, in some spots, the strap is quite thick because there isn't any cut out area there. Sometimes people don't make the cut out areas to the exact shape or size of the originals, but who are you or anyone else to say that is incorrect?

Are you basically then saying that the patterns most people use, which are the ones developed by Simkins and Connoly are wrong? Most people have used the patterns on the Legio XX site. So if you're basing your opinion on reconstructions you've seen by people who've used them, don't you think that's a little unfair? If there is nothing wrong with the patterns they've been using, then it's their fabrication methods. We can't all be professionals, nor have access to originals.

It's elitist to say that they are all wrong, simply because someone didn't make their cut out areas big enough. Big deal. My lacing loops on my segmentata look like brass monstrosities, and they're not even a round shape at all. But that was the best I did at the time...they aren't WRONG, just poory constructed. And they certainly don't detract from my impression, or make me look any less authentic.

Just like the use of milk paint on scuta. I'm not repainting my shield, I'm not buying specialized paint for it either. But Matt Amt had the best attitude about it, saying something to the effect of: Well, we're going to do it, but if you don't want to, no problem! You can still come out and play with us. Basically, don't take yourself too seriously, and just enjoy it! Over analyzing and studying something to death can really take the fun out of it...maybe not for you, but for others.

Certainly if you held a fine eye glass to my gear, you'd probably end up throwing it all out because of things that just aren't authentic, even though it's the best that I could do at the time, give modern conventions. If you're able to do better, bravo! But don't be condeming anyone else for their attempts.

[Matt Lukes]

hock: I'm confused- isn't this the kind of thing all the time? New information (to us at least) is presented and shows how stuff can be improved and to recognize where the flaws are... right?

[Martin Moser]

I have a related question about caligea; are their any finds with extra heel pieces added into the layers making the sole, so that the heel is taller? My first pair compressed far more in the heel than the rest of the foot and it messes with my calf muscles.
Some stacked leather medieval pattens made in the same way as roman shoes have just heels added in between the whole soles.

With the finds I am aquainted with nothing the like is reported, be it caligae or other kinds of shoes. Soles are generally flat with no trace of a raised heel. AFAIK raised heels are known from achaeological finds only from about the 15/16th century AD onwards.

[Martin Moser]

At that pic seems as if another band were in the inner side, probably glued, marked by a clearer coloration of the leather.
What do you think?

I'd say yes, probably. Actually it may have been sewn on, can't say for sure, but there seem to be traces of holes on the left side at about the height of the lower of the 3 torn off straps. At least this was a quite common feature with the Mainz finds.

[gaiusseptimiuslucianus]

With the finds I am aquainted with nothing the like is reported, be it caligae or other kinds of shoes. Soles are generally flat with no trace of a raised heel. AFAIK raised heels are known from achaeological finds only from about the 15/16th century AD onwards.

Martin,

Heels burst on the scene in the 1590s, they are very seldom seen before that. By the first decade of the 17th century they have become very common indeed, either as a separate added group of heel lifts or covered timber heel, or as a wedge added between the layers of the sole. I have added a split lift before now to ramshaw style boots that I made for someone who had a heel spur and needed a little extra heel help.

Lucianus
_______
L.E. Pearson

[James B.]

With the finds I am aquainted with nothing the like is reported, be it caligae or other kinds of shoes. Soles are generally flat with no trace of a raised heel. AFAIK raised heels are known from achaeological finds only from about the 15/16th century AD onwards.

I don't mean a raised heel like a modern one, what I refer too is seen in 13th century leather pattens and beyond. I will try and descried it well. Say the patten is seven layers of sole with the strapping sandwiched between the top two layers. Some examples a piece of leather just at the heel sandwiched in between the top two layers also, the front of the foot is still just seven layers but the heel is eight. The heel is built up more but not on the bottom of the patten it is in the center of the construction. I know one 14th c example that has two heel additions sandwiched in.

Here is an image of what I mean, the medieval heel not the raised heel:



I know this is not a great image but do you see what I mean?


I accept this may not be a practice of the Romans but I thought I would make sure we were about talking the same thing.

Thanks